We had a very good meeting for almost three and a half hours last week on this issue. Everybody would agree that there is a great deal of confusion about what bogs are affected.
Prohibition on Turf Cutting: Discussion.
We have received some information since that meeting. Members will recall that we held a meeting last week with the IFA and the Creggan/Crosswood Turbary Group and the Turf Cutters and Contractors Association. This was our second meeting on the prohibition on the cutting of turf in certain areas. Following inquiries made by the clerk from the National Parks and Wildlife Service after last week's meeting I can advise that the advisory group set up by the Minister is to conclude deliberations before Christmas and it will make recommendations to the Minister. If its recommendations result in proposals for action, and if implementation of any action involves cost, the Minister is likely to bring the matter to the Government before implementing anything. Legislative change may be necessary to deal with compensation, with the timing of the cessation of turfcutting and so on and the follow on from the advisory group will take time.
The transposition of this directive was effected in 1997 and a derogation was effected for ten years without a legislative base. The Government of the day did this for itself and to allow landowners to seek alternative sources of fuel. There is nothing to sign at this year's end as was suggested at our meeting. That, coupled with the fact that the turfcutting season is unlikely to start before April 2010 at the earliest, suggests that the follow-up action of the committee is not as urgent as was suggested last week. I invite suggestions and comments from members who were here last week. It is urgent if a decision is to be made by the end of the year.
I was not aware of this advisory group, it is new to me.
That is the information we have now.
Regardless of that, people in rural areas did not know they could not cut on their bogs. Some can cut domestically while there are others who can cut commercially — there is total confusion. I suggested last week that we get the maps and development plans from the National Parks and Wildlife Service on a county by county basis so we can see what is proposed and where so that people can be informed.
Sometimes the names on those maps mean nothing to local people, they are obscure or relate to old electoral divisions. We want it clearly spelt out, county by county, what bogs will be affected.
Every county should be done individually — that is my point — with the proper maps, detailing each townland so people know exactly how they will be affected. There are plans to exclude more bogs from turf cutting.
Ms Síle O'Connor last week wanted classification on the area versus range, clarification with maps used by the NPWS and publication of the management plans. We have asked for all this but have not got it yet. We could then explain the notification or lack thereof to land owners. Deputy Naughten wanted copies of studies conducted by the NPWS and copies of their maps and to amend the terms of reference. Deputy O'Rourke wanted to invite the Minister before us to ensure he does not sign off in January.
This issue will keep cropping up because there is huge anger across the midlands and west about it. The Minister cannot keep his head in the sand, he must meet representatives of the domestic turf cutters and sort it out once and for all. We requested a meeting with the Minister last week. The Government must abandon or defer this.
It was suggested by Deputy Feighan that we defer it for two years. The turf cutters were not even happy with that. They want it taken off the agenda in its entirety. Domestic turf cutting has been proved not to damage the bogs; the commercial enterprises have caused the problems. The people who appeared before us last week did not cause the damage. It should be deferred permanently because it is only a regulation from the EU and we have gone mad on the implementation of regulations.
We want to bring closure to this because there is huge anger about the issue. Deputies from the midlands and west have attended public meetings every other night on this issue, with attendances of up to 800 people, because there is so much concern that people will be stripped of their entitlement to cut turf. It is part of our culture and this encroaches on people's right to do what they like with their own land. Fauna and flora will continue to grow. No one has more respect for property than the owner. There must a common sense approach so I would ask the Minister to meet the turf cutters on the issue.
First of all, coming back to Deputy Scanlon's point on the advisory group, it is an interdepartmental working group that was established during the summer. It was mentioned at our meeting during July but the changing of names has added to the confusion. This group has heard submissions from all of the representative bodies. The difficulty is that even though the Minister gave a commitment in the House in March to allow for all of the evidence to be considered and to allow the interdepartmental group to make recommendations based on it, because of the way the terms of reference are structured, the interdepartmental group can only make recommendations on the cessation of turf cutting; it cannot make recommendations that would allow for turf cutting to continue in specific circumstances. That is why I requested we direct the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to amend the terms of reference and let the interdepartmental group make its recommendations so we can then question it on those recommendations. That is a fundamental flaw of the group at the moment.
We need a copy of the baseline maps that have been used by the NPWS to carry out the designation. The written submission by the turf cutters provided a huge amount of detail on individual bogs which was at variance with what the NPWS told this committee. Not only the oral submission but the written submission from the turf cutters should be given to the NPWS with a request to respond in detail to the issues that have been raised. It would give the committee the material to proceed further at that stage.
It will be difficult if the terms of reference are changed and the advisory group must report before Christmas.
It has held the hearings on the basis that everything is included but the terms of reference do not provide for that.
This is a national issue. The committee that was established is interdepartmental and does not take on board the views of ordinary turf cutters. We represent those people and their views must be taken on board.
The letter stated that compensation was being looked at. That is a red herring. Most of the farmers we have dealt with are getting €3,000 in compensation but their files have been locked away because there is no money to pay them compensation. The terms of reference are flawed.
Will the Minister sign off on this on 1 January?
It says here there is nothing to sign.
Will it be an offence on 1 January for people to cut turf?
According to the document I have, transposition of this directive was in 1997 and derogation applied for ten years without a legislative base. The Government of the day did this to allow land owners time to seek alternative sources of fuel. There is nothing to sign at the end of this year, as was suggested at our meeting. That fact, coupled with the fact that the turf cutting season is unlikely to start before Christmas suggests that follow up action from this committee is not as urgent as it was last week. I disagree, however, I think it is urgent.
No one will cut turf on 1 January.
The ten year derogation expires so there is nothing to sign.
Work will be done to prepare for turf cutting. Contractors must get machinery ready so we need to know the situation. The indication is that we have until April to decide but that is bunkum. We need clarity because machinery requires a significant investment.
Unfortunately this was signed by a Minister in 1997, meaning that the Government accepted the directive.
Will we have to try to change it?
That is what we have to try to do if we can.
How shall we go about it?
We cannot do anything about it until we know exactly what is happening in every townland in every county throughout the country. One cannot change anything until one knows what has to be changed. We do not know that at this point in time. Even those out in the bogs cutting turf do not know.
Is it agreed then, on Deputy Scanlon's suggestion, that we look for the maps on a county by county basis?
Yes, county by county, townland by townland on the relevant map.
Perhaps the derogation can be extended until the maps are found.
I am not sure if that is in the Minister's gift. We must try to do something but we cannot do that until we know what to do.
We have three suggestions from the meeting that we look for the maps county by county,——
With the management plan.
——we request that the terms of reference be changed and seek a two-year derogation again to allow us solve this problem. Is that agreed?
Yes.
We should ask that they respond to the submissions.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Sitting suspended at 10.40 a.m. and resumed at 10.45 a.m.